Wright v. State — Third District affirmed without a written explanation

Case
Samuel Wright v. State of Florida
Court
Florida Third District Court of Appeal
Judge
MILLER; GOODEN; REBULL
Date Decided
October 8, 2026
Docket No.
3D26-1304
Topics
Criminal Appeals; Summary Affirmance; Pro Se Litigation
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Samuel Wright, representing himself, appealed from a ruling of the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in lower-tribunal case number F05-12002B. Circuit Judge Marisa Tinkler Mendez presided below.

The appeal proceeded under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). The State of Florida was represented by Attorney General James Uthmeier.

The Court’s Holding

The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the circuit court’s ruling. The decision was issued per curiam by Judges Miller, Gooden, and Rebull.

The opinion provides no reasoning and does not describe the circuit court’s ruling, Wright’s arguments, or the grounds for affirmance. It states only: “Affirmed.”

Key Takeaways

  • The Third District affirmed the circuit court’s ruling.
  • The appeal was brought under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2).
  • Because the opinion contains no analysis, it does not establish a stated rationale for the result.

Why It Matters

The decision leaves the circuit court’s ruling in place but supplies no written reasoning for attorneys or lower courts to apply in other cases. The opinion also notes that it is not final until disposition of any timely filed motion for rehearing.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top